# Opinions wanted on Havana's from the CS Gorillas



## poker (Dec 11, 1997)

I was reading ASC (alt.smokers.cigars newsgroup) and saw an interesting thread that got me thinking.

Here is what it said (cut & paste)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

the HU Connoisseur uses an average Hermoso/Robusto liga, not
the one of yore. Just try one and compare it to a cabinet selection RyJ Exhib 4 and a SLR Regios - same manufacture, same batch - in a *blind* taste, and you won't find a lot of differences, to say the least.

The same applies to other cigars. For instance, the SLR Churchill
(tubos) taste exactly the same as the R&J Churchill, while cab
selections and SBN's still taste like SLR's. For how long?

And, IMO, this is a *BIG* problem : when I smoke a Cazadores, I want a Cazadores, not an average Dalia. The Cubans have been "rationalizing" their lines, bozo-style, and most cigars only differ because of their bands, boxes and retail prices.

Oh, did I mention the cabinet of Bolivar Petits Coronas with a nice
Cohiba Siglo - banded, of course - stuck in the middle ? Or what I - as well as a growing number of people - have seen in Havana : the same liga is used for all similarly sized cigars!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I bring this question to the many folks here: Have you noticed something simular as well? I mean, as far as one cigar brand tasting very much like another? 

This past weekend, I broke out with a box of cigars that I couldnt remember what they were. The cigars were unbanded & reboxed, so no obvious visual clues to behold. The cigars were inspected by a few of the folks that evening & many said it sure looked like SLR Churchills. I passed everyone there a cigar from the box and we all lit them up. Two of the folks there swore it was a H Upmann Sir Winston or Monarch. The cigar visually had absolutely no box press to it & we all agreed it looked as it was from a cabinet.
I finally was so curious as to what this cigar was, I went and dug thru some older emails I had saved. 

The box of cigars turned out to be Bolivar Churchill Tubos.

Once again, has anyone else noticed that many cigars tend to taste like many of their differently banded & boxed cousins?


----------



## rkt (Dec 12, 1997)

Well, since my pallate has not been tainted from smoking too many ISOMs, I really can't say for sure. BUT if you could send me a couple of each cigar in question I will review them and post back on this topic.


----------



## Brandon (Dec 11, 1997)

I'm by no means an expert with a refined palate, but personally, I've had some cigars that tasted very similar, if not identical to others. Personally, I don't go seeking out specific brands as much as when I first started. I'll mainly look at the size preferred, price, and age when purchasing. I think it makes purchasing easier. LOL To me, a good cigar is a good cigar... no matter what the band says.


----------



## robmcd (Apr 9, 2002)

the only real test of this that i've had recently is k1's blind smoke... he sent me a 98 vrda and i would have sworn on the new guy's (daver) life that it was a 98 lusi. i mean, it had the definitive partagas taste... there was no doubt in my mind that it was a part.


----------



## seagarsmoker (Jan 1, 2000)

To the most part this is true for the new stuff (01/02). The only one that really tastes different to me are Cohibas (which I mean are close to what they have tasted like since '95). I probably like the new ones since most tend to taste like a blend of Ramone Alones & Montis. The biggest letdown for me though are Bolis. I really miss the pre '98 & pre '94 taste/flavor.


----------



## cigartexan (Jan 1, 2000)

The only two cigars I have that were used as examples in the article are the Cohiba Siglo II and the Boli PC Cab. They look the same in size and color. I would double smoke them, but the CS II is an '01 and the Boli PC is a '98. Age would play a factor, plus I just lit a Punch Churchill. I will smoke them tomorrow and report my findings.

As for the rest of the examples, I have never had both of any in my possesion at the same time.

If you want to send me a Upmann Coni and a SLR churchill, I would be more than happy to compare them to my RYJ Churchill and Exb #4 :9  :9 

Jack


----------



## MTusa (Jan 1, 2000)

Not having the refined palate of some of my fellow LLGs, I will just add that the 2001 Partagas PCs I have smoked "taste like chicken".
M


----------



## dayplanner (Dec 11, 1997)

I have both the Boli PC Cab and the Siglo II, I don't think they are similar at all, the construction on the Sig is firmer and it has a decidedly more robust taste. I love em both, but I think the similarity ends with thier being the same size. I haven't tasted anything that tastes like a VR, very distinctive taste. The Caz and the Cedros deluxe #1 are suprizingly alike however, just a big difference in price. I also haven't found anything that tastes quite like a SLR PC from 98 or 97. I do think that the SLR Churchill and the RyJ Churchill have a lot of similarities. JMHO }>


----------



## drrgill (Jan 1, 2000)

Being a Rookie every ISOM is a new adventure for me. I now know that Swishers are better than White Owls
Griffins are better than Swishers
Short Story are better than Griffins
New ISOMS are better than all of the above
and Aged ISOMS (Thanks Poker) are better than young ISOMS.

But seriously are you telling me that some day years from now I will prefer a specific Brand and or Year and will be able to tell the difference between two fine ISOMS?? and name them including the year.


Its great to have the knowledge but I just want to smoke what is enjoyable TO ME and not make a statement to anyone else.

Thanks Poker for stimulating our minds I am amazed at the combined Knowledge of this board for Cigars. 

Drrgill


----------



## TAK (Jan 1, 2000)

Poker,

IMHO the HU Conn taste nothing like a R&J #4 or a SLR Regios

Never tried the Churchills

Nothing tastes like a Boli PC!  :9 

TAK :7


----------



## robmcd (Apr 9, 2002)

lmao... good one ;-)


----------



## dayplanner (Dec 11, 1997)

[updated:LAST EDITED ON Sep-27-02 AT 11:36 AM (CDT)]This is a helluva interesting debate, so here's my two cents worth.

I will admit to not having as refined a palate of some of the other gorillas but I do notice differences in a lot of cigars.

Last night I had two PCs at the pub with some friends; a Boli from 98 and an SLR from 00. There was a profound difference in the tastes.

A couple days ago I had a Boli RC first and a RASS about 20 minutes after finishing the Boli. Again, very different in the tastes.

drill's blindsmoke I received was a great cigar. I couldn't tell what it was but it did have a nice kick and flavors. My first thought was a Boli then I thought it might be an Upmann Monarcas. It turned out to be a Partagas Churchill. Go figure.

Me thinks the ability to determine the specific brand may have something to do with how many of a particular brand one smokes regularly. No scientific proof to back this up but just a hunch. One of my friends smokes Partagas about 95% of the time. I've tried to fool him by giving him some unbanded smokes and he can tell which are the Partagas about 98% of the time. What he can't do is tell me what the brand is of the ones that aren't Partagas. While I can tell the difference right off the bat between say a Boli RC and a CoRo, he can't. My theory is his palate is so conditioned to Partagas he can't distinguish any of the nuances in other lines.

Also, I believe there may be some truth in the Cubans are producing say a Lusi and banding it as a RAG or Punch. Perhaps they do this based on what demand is out there and, if a shortage exists in one line (based on dealer demand), they simply produce and band it as such. Of course, I can't prove this. But it seems possible. Kind of like the situation (which turned into a brouhaha) a number of years ago when Olds was putting Chevy engines in cars when the assembly lines couldn't meet the market demand for Olds cars and the Chevy cars weren't selling as well as expected. The simply took Chevy engines and put them in the Olds.

JMHO, but I could be dead wrong. Dunno.


----------



## ESP (Jan 1, 2000)

Dittos! 

I also find the post ‘00 stuff getting harder and harder to differentiate,, although there are some differences and some cigars –such as those you noted still hold their distinct signature/blend,, but generally, the taste profile on many similar formats are becoming very close,, I remember seeing this topic brought up by an icg veteran ace - about a year ago,,

In short, IMO Habanos is taking us for fools,, and unfortunately we can’t protest by going elsewhere, nor start smoking Dominicans instead! – i.e., the captive audience syndrome sucks! x(


----------



## mcgoospot (Jan 1, 2000)

Great topic Poker-I have to agree somewhat with flipflop, I thin the ability to differentiate depends alot on how ofter you smoke that particular cigar. I've found distinctive flavors in Cohibas, RA, SLR and Montes. As for the RyJs, Since I don't smoke them very often, I doubt that I could pick one out. I tried my own taste test recently with a RASS, PSD#4 and CoRo and was able to differentiate all three sticks(all were summer '01 production). I believe, however, that one of the reasons that I could differentiate was because I smoked them in succession. I'm not sure I would have been able to pick out the RASS, for example, if I didn't know that one of the three smokes was a RASS and if I didn't have the other two sticks for comparison. I know that my RASS, RA898s and RAGs have a distinctively different flavor that the PSD#4, 898s and Lusis from Partagas. I really question a persons ability (unless he smokes10-15 ISOMs daily) to be able to differentiate brands in today's cigar climate.


----------



## rkt (Dec 12, 1997)

On that note, it wasn't the Chevy owners that got as upset 
about the swap as it was Olds owners. The Olds engine is 
rated as a better engine. Olds owners got Chevy engines in
their cars and they were very upset. 

This was time when GM was trying to make the Corporate V8
as they have done today. The Olds engine was to be the
Corporate V8. The same as the Aurora V8 was to be the 
car V8 of the future and the Aurora V6 was to the corporate
V6 for GM. Of course, since they discontinuing Olds this 
strategy has changed. They have spent hundreds of millions
planning this switch all through the 90's and now dropping
it to keep the poorer engines.


----------



## poker (Dec 11, 1997)

Thanks everyone for your input. 

I really agree with magoospots comment "...questioning a persons ability (unless he smokes 10-15 ISOMs daily) to be able to differentiate brands in today's cigar climate."

Seems a lot harder now days than it used to be with many of the cigars currently available.


----------



## ESP (Jan 1, 2000)

...Seems a lot harder now days than it used to be with many of the cigars currently available... 

You nailed it right on the head my friend! I quote seagarsmoker on this regard:

“The biggest letdown for me though are Bolis. I really miss the pre '98 & pre '94 taste/flavor.”  :9 

p.s. the person who smokes 10-15 ISOMs daily probabley has no taste buds left! he can even save some bucks smoking Jose Piedras with Partagas bands! }>


----------



## poker (Dec 11, 1997)

Agree on the Boli's as well but there others I miss too...


Montecristo from the early 90's (oh man, talk about a classic)
Romeo y Julieta (especially the Celestial Finos) from the mid/late 80's (oh man, talk about knee bending LOL)


----------



## filly (Dec 12, 1997)

"Romeo y Julieta (especially the Celestial Finos) from the mid/late 80's (oh man, talk about knee bending LOL)"

My ALL time favorite smoke, hands down!!!!!! (and knees too! 
:7 )


----------



## Dipteran (Jan 1, 2000)

I think that two issues are being confused in this thread. The first is whether the various brands of Habanos taste identical. I take strong issue with this assertion. There are, perhaps, several vitolas of different brands (I believe the example was R&J Churchills and SLR Churchills) that may taste very similar, but there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that the brands are largely differentiable. If one smokes an R&J Exhibicion #4 and then a Partagas Series D #4, one after another, one detects obvious differences in strength and flavor of these robustos. Thus I would maintain that there are still marked differences between most brands. VRs, for example, are much earthier than Hoyos. Bolivars still maintain the gutsiness that makes them stand out among modern Habanos. RASSs have a unique spicy flavor, as do
Upmann Sir Winstons. 

However, though the brands are DIFFERENTIABLE, they may not necessarily be IDENTIFIABLE when tasted blind. The former depends on the ability to tell cigars apart when smoked at the same time; the latter on one's taste memory.

This is similar to wine tasting. If you read Jancis Robinson's latest book about wine, you will see that even professional tasters have trouble identifying wines tasted blind: Bordeaux and Burgundies and Rhones can all be confused, as can many whites. But nobody would maintain that these wines all taste the same. Drunk side by side, one can tell the difference (although my experience with Burgundy is almost nonexistent!). 

I've smoked a fair number of Habanos from the same year (98, 99, and 2001 being the most recent), and, in my opinion, there are marked differences among brands and among vitolas within brands. Howver, I don't deny the possibility that SOME brands (and esp. some vitolas within brands) may taste very similar.


----------



## poker (Dec 11, 1997)

[updated:LAST EDITED ON Sep-28-02 AT 11:58 AM (CDT)]Very interesting points you bring up. I must agree for the most part in your statement about brands being differtiable yet not necessarily identifiable.

The reason for my original post is that while we at times pay premiums for certain brands & vitiolas within those brands we believe to be unique (which they should be, depending on their blend), in many recent production cigars there seems to be almost a generic flavor/strength profile in many. To me, it seems that what was at one time very unique to a specific label/vitola, taste has become muddled to a point where it is very hard to decern between labels.

Something else to ponder (just to confuse the Havana smoker even more so LOL) is current taste differences with same sizes within one brand (keeping in mind both are of a same & more recent production date):

For example...

H Upmann Sir Winston
H Upmann Monarch

Romeo y Julieta Churchill
Romeo y Julieta Prince of Wales

Partagas 8-9-8 (Varnished)
Partagas Selection Privada No 1

I very much believe that at one time (say, a decade ago), that the differences between the Sir Winstons and the Monarchs were *very* profound in terms of strength and flavor. I beleieve it could also apply to the others I have listed. Yet, considering todays current production of the Sir Winston & the Monarch, is the differece so profound, one can justify paying a difference of as much as 6-8 dollars more for the Sir Winston?

Personally I cannot verify this as I have yet to try to smoke a Sir Winston & a Monarch of equal production dates back to back or side by side.

Probably another factor which adds to my confusion, is that I personally have a very hard time distinguishing certain flavors which I know many others can taste. I mean, I can taste things like bitterness, sweetness, even coffee sometimes (when Im not drinking coffee with my cigar LOL), but when it comes to labeling "flavors" I have a hard time.

I guess thoughts like these are what kept me out of the really good schools (per George Carlin) ;-)

I just miss the days when a Bolivar or Partagas tasted, without a doubt, just like what a Partagas or Bolivar should taste like.


----------



## Dakota (Jan 1, 2000)

Sadly, this was a goal of mine. Would love to be able to blind test and know the difference  Now I think I'll just enjoy the cigar I,m smoking or throw it away  
Todd (Thanks for the thread)


----------



## ESP (Jan 1, 2000)

...I just miss the days when a Bolivar or Partagas tasted, without a doubt, just like what a Partagas or Bolivar should taste like... 


Well said!,, this is not a black & white topic, only different shades of grey!  

I can see that for someone not familiar with our general state of mind! (at least myself and a few others  - i.e., respect for the good’ol days of Havanas, may think we were referring to all recent Havanas tasting the same - although I thought the few who said that, were clear and pretty much were comparing the older day Havanas that contained a distinct signature compared to their watered down versions these days,, of course a recent production MC differs in taste from Bolivars, SLRs and so on,, but the gap is narrowing as the distinct blends and tobaccos, as well as master blenders become endangered species!,, :-( however for those who have tasted pre '94 cigars would remember the more pronounced differences and as you noted Partagas and Bolivars are good examples for full - kick ass flavours ,,

Actually I saw a similar complaint by James Suckling of CA in his Dec 2001 article. He refers to lack of ligero and use of new hybrids instead of criollo, rushing the curing and fermentation process, ignorant quality control personnel and ignoramus tobacco research technicians in factories…leading to the present day quality. 
(see http://www.cigaraficionado.com/Cigar/Aficionado/HavanaCorner/havana_corner30.html )


----------



## Lusi (Jan 1, 2000)

There are a lot of valuable issues in this string. Allow me to summarize a few and offer a suggestion.

POKER and several others make the observation that many of their recent ISOMs are tasting more and more similar to one another and less and less identifiable by brand and vitola de galera.

DIPTERAN offers a valid and useful distinction between "identifiable" and "different." Just because we might not be able to identify a recently produced robusto that a generous buddy sent us as, for example, an Epi # 2; that doesn't mean there aren't real differences among robustos and that if we smoked that Epi back to back with, say, a PSD4, we wouldn't be able to notice differences and more than likely pick which stick is which. I agree with Dipteran on this point as well as on the refinement that FLIPFLOP makes-- namely, that familiarity with a particular brand will increase our ability to identify that brand (WHOOPS, I initially typed "bland" instead of "brand") --even blind--a further indication that differences do in fact still exist. 

As always, ESP makes a lot of sense when he suggests that the obvious fact that the flavor of ISOMs has been dumbed down since at least 94 shouldn't confuse us as to the fact that there are nevertheless differences--albeit correspondingly muted ones--between similar sized vitolas across brands.

POKER jumps back in and says (practically), why don't we put this debate to the test and smoke, by way of example, Monarcas and Sir Winstons, R&J Churchills and PWs, Partagas 898vs and SP1s back to back? Poker's suggestions are extensively variable--why not Siglo II, MC 4, PU RS 12, etc, and Siglo IV, Epi 1, Mag46, PP, etc, and other vitolas?

SUGGESTION (finally): Unfortunately, I can't attend the LOLHII, but might not some of the rest of you LLGs organize parallel tastings and report back to us on the results. I'd be willing to contribute a few sticks to the common good, and maybe others would as well if someone who's attending is willing to take this on. (Maybe there's no room left in that already action-packed event, and if so we might consider it for next time.)

P.S. to Poker: I can't speak to your other examples, but I've had Monarcas and SWs from recent years and similar provenance, and IMO the price differential isn't justified. The SWs have a cache (was it that beautiful green cabinet?) that doesn't seem to me to hold up.


----------



## seagarsmoker (Jan 1, 2000)

After reading all of the posts, I would like to add one comment - maybe, just maybe, it will take a few years for these cigars to mature as individuals? 
My real problem with this as a cigar smoker is I just don't smoke all the different cigars for each line. I buy boxes and if I like the taste/flavor, I buy more! lol
The basic fact is I buy what I have had good luck with in the past (or if one of my good friends tell me this is a must buy) and seldom dip into many of the cousin cigars you spoke of. I may have one or two, but thats hardly enough experience to draw any real conclusions with.
ESP may be right and we're just stuck with the way things are.


----------



## poker (Dec 11, 1997)

Thanks for posting Lusi. Once again, this board shows the deep knowledge of many of the members & their true love of the leaf. Of the cigars you mentioned in your post, the only one I believe I can pick out would be the Cohibas. Personally, there is a 
distinct aroma & sweetness to the Cohiba line which I believe sets it apart from many others. Maybe it has to do with the 3rd fermention, but I dont know for sure. If theres one cigar I can usually pick out of a blind line up, its the Cohiba brand.

Last night during one of our usual patio herfs, this topic came up again. This time it concerned a couple other cigars. The Punch Petit Coronas del Punch and the Bolivar Petit Coronas. Both cigars were from cabinets & both the same size being Marevas. Being cabinets, neither cigar had bands. Both cigars were from a 1998 production date. 2 cigars of each were lit at the same time for a total of 4 cigars.

After initial lighting, 4 of the 4 folks involved in puffing one then the other *side by side*, all had come to the same conclusion. These 2 cigars tasted virtually identical. One person made a comment about one having a slightly fuller body, but taste wise, everyone agreed they were indistiguishable from the other.

Backyard research at its finest ;-)


----------



## poker (Dec 11, 1997)

Very possible J!


----------



## poker (Dec 11, 1997)

3rd fermention? LOL....I meant "fermentation".


----------



## dvickery (Jan 1, 2000)

hope i can word this question right(dont want to upset anyone).
in pokers post and the replies. it is generally conceded that habanos are becoming "homogenized".
does this include the 99 and 00 smokes?pretty much everyone that responded to pokers post has also said that 99 & 00 were "off"years well what makes them off.
if habanos all taste alike...does that mean since 00 or since 96 or what?seems to me(if you meen since 00)that a few years may make a difference and bring out some of the subtle flavors that are muted or overpowered by youth now.

derrek :7


----------



## poker (Dec 11, 1997)

I understand what you mean Derrek and it can also pose as a possibility. 
The big reason many folks dislike the 99/00 years generally has more to do with the construction problems and the widespread use during that time of the H2000 wrappers. During the 99/00 time frame, Habanos SA had set unrealistic goals in terms of production quantities which led to many complaints in the resulting quality of the cigars that were produced. Plugged or over filled cigars were the main problems I heard of from many folks. Also the lack of strength possibly due to what seemed like less Ligero leaf was also widely noticed. 

It was always my understanding that age will marry the different blends together and take any harsh edge or bite off a cigar, but the flavor profile should remain faily consistant. I very well could be wrong in this assumption. Thoughts?


----------



## DUFFER (Dec 11, 1997)

Certain brands like SLR have such a unique flavor profile that the good ones stand alone. I've had some Boli and Partagas PCs I couldn't tell apart.

To me the better the cigar the more the flavor it was meant to have stands out. The blander a stick the more androgynous it becomes.


----------



## drill (Jan 1, 2000)

hello,
i gotta somewhat disagree bro :


Something else to ponder (just to confuse the Havana smoker even more so LOL) is current taste differences with same sizes within one brand (keeping in mind both are of a same & more recent production date):

For example...

H Upmann Sir Winston
H Upmann Monarch

of the old ones there is a big diff swc best smoke in the world(jmho)
monarchs were stronger more pepper full taste
of the newer ones ive compared 97,98,99
i can still taste the diff between the 2 
and i also must add that the monarchs have severly went downhill (jmho again)

Romeo y Julieta Churchill
Romeo y Julieta Prince of Wales
:: the old ones you could never mix up
the newer ones i smoke (98's or earlir)
you can still tell they are both ryj and they do have some characteristics in common but the pow is still more refined by far with subtle nuances that confuse most but the most avid ryj smokers
the churchill is not so complex but ends with a bigger bang

Partagas 8-9-8 (Varnished)
Partagas Selection Privada No 1

:: im not familar with either of these as new cigars ,iv only had 1 or 2 of each of younger than early 98
but of 97 and earlier i have found these cigars specially the 898's vary alot! from month to month production!

the privadas i found dont change as much but they do 
just say from late 96 to 97 i see a change and again in (mho) the 97 's were/are better 
though the best find in a long time was about a 4 month stretch 
when the 898's were so incredibly strong that ive seen full fledged
cigar smokers get sick.

by the way bro i did try to post to this earlier saying just a little 
but if i remember correctly around the first few months of 00
production everything , everything tasted the same ,
i remember trying a bbf,punch dc, and another smoke and couldnt tell a bit of difference .

if you set up a bs with all jan 00 stuff i bekieve you will find they all have very strong similarilies!
move the bs to jan 01 stuff you will see change to the better
jan o2 stuff what ive tried so far shows extremely good promise and was tasty!
k
always are exceptions to the rule!


----------



## poker (Dec 11, 1997)

I agree 100% with your opinion on the pre 97 cigars. Its the 98, 99, 00 years I have a problem with. Pre 98 cigars are available less and less now days and with good reason. What *is* available although is many '98, '99, & '00 stuff. I agree as well that the 2001 batches are in fact better in terms of construction and flavor than prior years and the 02 stuff shows great promise.

My inquiry had more to do with cigars made in the same more recent (98 to 01) time frame. Especially those of different brands made within the same factory and comparing a 1999 to a 1999, 2000 to a 2000, etc.

I dont doubt that many folks can tell a difference between many cigars, but for the life of me, I cannot in many cases. I wanted to know if I was just imagining this or if it was something that anyone else noticed.


----------



## Brandon (Dec 11, 1997)

Nope it's just you. You just lack the refined, sophisticated palate. Personally, I can always detect the hit of anise in a RyJ pc, the underlying truffle flavor in a Sir Winston, the subtle cotton candy flavors in a Siglo 1, and the feces/lemon/vinegar flavors of a Upmann corona major ;-)


----------



## sirwinston (Jan 1, 2000)

poker, let me first say that I have not read any of the replies to this thread yet. The reason for that is I didn't want others opinions to sway my thoughts before I posted this. Also I have not smoked some of the cigars you mention here but... I buy samplers from a guy in (blank). Every now and then he sends me a freebie or two. The freebies come unbanded and he expects me to guess what they are. Although I haven't bought from him in a few months now I would guess that he has sent me 10 or 12 freebies and I was wrong only once. Some of them he sent I had never smoked before. HEY, it ain't braggin if you can do it! 
Maybe there is something to it, and I wouldn't put it past the Cubans or anyone else in business these days, but I haven't noticed it yet.


----------



## Brandon (Dec 11, 1997)

No offense to Wayne


----------



## filly (Dec 12, 1997)

no offense to OPT, just that some of his cigars are offensive! lmaorotf }>


----------



## DiverBob (Apr 15, 2002)

My belated $0.02.

First, I must say that I do not have the benefit of knowing what it used to be like in the good old days. I did not discover Havanas until just over a year ago and my experience with vintage smokes is pretty much nill.

I do notice a distinct similarity in flavor between a number of the perla and minuto sized cigars. To me they all have an espresso-like flavor and I don't honestly know if I could taste the difference between Monte 5s and Punch Petit Punch or Partags Shorts, SC EP and RASCC (all from 2001). Some may have more intense flavors or a little more kick, but I have not done a side by side comparison. The good news in this, however, is that I love this flavor and it's nice to know that a number of different brands will be equally satisfying.

As far as some of the larger cigars, I can only fairly compare a handful of robustos from 2001. I do taste a distinct difference between Epi 2s, VR Famosos and RASS and I'm pretty sure I could identify them in a blind taste test, but I've never tried it.

The bottom line for me is that I really like the flavor that Cuban tobacco has to offer and if there is a similarity in flavor among different brands, that really doesn't bother me unless they start making them taste like Dominicans.


----------



## poker (Dec 11, 1997)

"...that really doesn't bother me unless they start making them taste like Dominicans."

LMAO! You and me both!


----------



## CCSmith (May 10, 2002)

Here's my opinion: Any Havanas I have gotten from the CS Gorillas have been great!


----------



## TAK (Jan 1, 2000)

Poker,

Although I have not smoked the two pc's back to back, I can taste a distinct differerance between them. This is especially after I am done and savor the aftertaste that remains. In fact I enjoy the aftertaste more than the actual taste that comes when I am smoking them. 

My 2 cents,

TAK :7


----------



## Jankjr (Jan 1, 2000)

Great conversation. A big thanks to all that have shared knowledge about this subject.... (I'm with DB, I don't know squat about vintage smokes vs. recent production).


----------



## ESP (Jan 1, 2000)

*RE: 97 SLR Series A*


----------



## ESP (Jan 1, 2000)

ping..


----------



## LasciviousXXX (Oct 12, 2004)

An Excellent thread! 

Thanx for bringing it back to light ESP. I was going through old posts today too after reading your Search thread.

XXX


----------



## jgros001 (Jun 14, 2005)

So, the questions in my mind would be: 

Has aging allowed the flavors to develop and distinguish themselves, ie brand to brand and vitola to vitola?

Is it still the opinion of some that many of the cigars being produced today ('04-05) are indistinguishable? Or would you maintain that the different brands and vitolas are unique from one another? 

This is a great thread and I have neither the palate nor the experience to make any comments, but I will ask questions.


----------



## opus (Jun 21, 2005)

jgros001 said:


> So, the questions in my mind would be:
> 
> Has aging allowed the flavors to develop and distinguish themselves, ie brand to brand and vitola to vitola?
> 
> ...


:tpd: Any comments?


----------



## LasciviousXXX (Oct 12, 2004)

As I posted in a couple other threads, I will be doing some comparisons tonite on larger format cigars of similar year of production and see if this is still the case.

In my mind because of the changes is crop,cultivation, etc in '03 the most recent crops of Habanos have been a little more distinct in flavor and might be more recongnizable. I'm no FOG, so this is just the opinion of a relative Newb so I would love to hear what the elders have to say about this.

XXX


----------



## ESP (Jan 1, 2000)

jgros001 said:


> So, the questions in my mind would be:
> 
> ....Is it still the opinion of some that many of the cigars being produced today ('04-05) are indistinguishable? Or would you maintain that the different brands and vitolas are unique from one another? ......


why do you think I pulled out this thread from the archives?  
IMO when comparing the pre 1997 cigars to even 04 & 05 cigars, there is a distinct lack of the aromatic and floral flavours in the recent cigars when compared to the older ones. Those floral notes are mostly responsible for "early detection of one brand from another" and as they are more muted than they used to, hence the relevance of this topic. The 04, 05 have plenty of stronger notes but the overall mixes in many vitolas are not as they should or could be. We are talking potential of making something great and not doing so due to the high demand for whatever they produce, no matter what. As long as Habanos produces these mediocre cigars and we keep raving about how great they are - then why should they change anything? The only time they did change was when the F**kup in 99-2000 got so bad that consumers reacted. These days they have improved (scientifically) to the point that the products are ideal for quick term aging and consumption, but I would not plan on aging many of the regular production Havanas for too long (I hope to eat my word in 10 years time and start a thread saying how great a 10yr old 04 Mag 46 has smoked! But at this time I doubt it!), and since people like myself area a very small minority of their customer basis (ALTADIS), they would say screw you, we will produce what sells most - NOW - rather than waiting 5 years before even releasing our cigars to the market. Do you think we are insane? People of Cuba need the money for medicine and their welfare now not 10 years later, and so on..

One example, I remember a one year old RASS almost being un- smokable in early 90's (cigar was still sick but showed hints of greatness and tons of the floral notes came through once in a rare while!) I remember that experience since it was a bet for me to finish smoking that cigar - all the way! (it was a party and we all had a good laugh at me wiping my tears as I knobbed the harsh cigar) and that same friend offered me another one from that same box nearly 10 years later - and that transformation was just amazing! I've done that sort of test with my own cigars and keep doing so, smoking them young to old and that's one reason I have lost faith in the new system - my own experience.

The mid 70's to early 90's Havanas are legend, but why shouldn't we be able to have the same legends repeated or even better them? These days there are more resources and more demand for good cigars, but unfortunately the whole operation is ran by a big corporation that does not understand the fineness of this art. I don't want to sound too pessimistic since like the rest of this captive audience I am very much committed to slide down the slippery slope - along with the rest of you! :al


----------



## Churchlady (Jan 22, 2004)

In my strange little head, I wonder if the rumor that Castro no longer smokes cigars IS true and therefore he has no particular interest in cigars anymore (except as a means of financing his mistresses), therefore like a kid who outgrows a toy, he let it drop. 

Therefore, no regulation, no quality control. 

Just the musings of the village idiot.

Also, Poker, have you noticed the flavor profiles growing to differentiate the various sticks you were talking about yet, or are they all still resting comfortably? ESP, you tried it yet? I mean the '01's & '02's - they're a few years older now... 1/2 way to ten...


----------



## mosesbotbol (Sep 21, 2005)

Churchlady said:


> In my strange little head, I wonder if the rumor that Castro no longer smokes cigars IS true and therefore he has no particular interest in cigars anymore (except as a means of financing his mistresses), therefore like a kid who outgrows a toy, he let it drop.
> 
> Therefore, no regulation, no quality control.
> 
> ...


Castro hasn't smoked cigars for a long time, and that has no impact to the importance of cigars in Cuba. He still has the passion for them and there's a lot of other people that play a role in Cuba besides Castro. He knows how important cigars are to Cuba and wouldn't shoot himself in the foot...

Cuba's problem until recently was having a current infrastructure to meet the increasing demand for cigars and maintaining the quality that is inherent of the product. Now, the factories are up-to-date and we should see wonderful cigars like 04 and 05. I just opened a box of 05 Monarchs and was amazed how well they were compared to 01's, and many could say the same for most brands in the last year. Whether they taste green or not, is another question, but if a cigar is just 3 months old, what do you expect...

These are exciting times for Habanos I think.


----------



## ESP (Jan 1, 2000)

Churchlady said:


> In my strange little head, I wonder if the rumor that Castro no longer smokes cigars IS true and therefore he has no particular interest in cigars anymore (except as a means of financing his mistresses), therefore like a kid who outgrows a toy, he let it drop.
> 
> Therefore, no regulation, no quality control.
> 
> ...


I tried a MC EL '00 gifted to me by Fredster,, it was very delicious and much better than when they were younger (I had some of the same vitola early on and have a full box resting intact for another 6 yrs!). But generally I don't care for EL's so this was an exception to the norm! we need input by others who are not as prejudice as I am regarding this Hanbanos thing!


----------



## Matt R (Dec 12, 1997)

ESP said:


> The 04, 05 have plenty of stronger notes but the overall mixes in many vitolas are not as they should or could be.


Morad, I think this is what pulls in the "new" Havana smokers and when they experience what a "real" Havana should taste like, they are often disappointed. These stronger notes are obviously the preferred type of blends at the present time, or else we wouldn't see the major producers of Non-Cubans pushing out the next great full-bodied cigar, meant to blow your head off when you smoke it. I would much rather have a delicate, floral noted blend that never pushes the edge to over-powering itself, over a monster of spice and pepper that leaves you tongue looking for a knife to scrape it clean. I like to taste my cigars as I'm smoking them, not two days later.


----------



## Fredster (Jan 26, 2004)

poker said:


> I was reading ASC (alt.smokers.cigars newsgroup) and saw an interesting thread that got me thinking.
> 
> Here is what it said (cut & paste)
> 
> ...


Poker,
I really have not noticed this. I pretty much smoke mainly stuff from 97-02. Everything I've smoked lately has it's own unique tastes, especially the stuff from 97 and 98. I wonder if they are talking more about young cigars. Young cigars taste similar to me, high in nicotine and other youthfull tastes. The stuff thats from 97 and 98 is so distincly different to me. No way I would say they taste similar at all. I would be willing to bet you could give me any cigar from my humi unbanded and I could tell you what it is no problem.


----------



## Fredster (Jan 26, 2004)

ESP said:


> I tried a MC EL '00 gifted to me by Fredster,, it was very delicious and much better than when they were younger (I had some of the same vitola early on and have a full box resting intact for another 6 yrs!). But generally I don't care for EL's so this was an exception to the norm! we need input by others who are not as prejudice as I am regarding this Hanbanos thing!


Glad you liked it. I though they were very good, but I really flip over the Part Pyramids and Monte D.C.'s.


----------



## mosesbotbol (Sep 21, 2005)

Matt R said:


> Morad, I think this is what pulls in the "new" Havana smokers and when they experience what a "real" Havana should taste like, they are often disappointed. These stronger notes are obviously the preferred type of blends at the present time, or else we wouldn't see the major producers of Non-Cubans pushing out the next great full-bodied cigar, meant to blow your head off when you smoke it. I would much rather have a delicate, floral noted blend that never pushes the edge to over-powering itself, over a monster of spice and pepper that leaves you tongue looking for a knife to scrape it clean. I like to taste my cigars as I'm smoking them, not two days later.


There's a time and place for both types of cigars, and it's probably harder to make the delicate floral ones, as balancing the notes without one being too pronounced is a feat.


----------



## Matt R (Dec 12, 1997)

mosesbotbol said:


> There's a time and place for both types of cigars, and it's probably harder to make the delicate floral ones, as balancing the notes without one being too pronounced is a feat.


Habanos did it on each and every cigar, pre-96. The powerhouse cigar that is so popular today, really is somewhat new. Sure, there were powerful Habanos in the past, most Bolivars for example, but in general the blends were a lot milder than todays blends. For some people this is obvious what they like to smoke and they find the right time for it. That's why they make so many different types of cigars. But, for someone who relishes the past blends, these newer blends really make me shy away from purchases. I haven't had but less than a dozen cigars from '03-'05 (aside from two and a half boxes of the LCDH Cologne Gold Medals) and they have all been way too much for me to enjoy. Will they mellow and mature into a great cigar, yeah, I think quite a few of them will. The Montecristo D seems to fit that bill, though it was just too harsh for me at present smoking condition.


----------



## IHT (Dec 27, 2003)

Matt R said:


> Morad, I think this is what pulls in the "new" Havana smokers and when they experience what a "real" Havana should taste like, they are often disappointed. These stronger notes are obviously the preferred type of blends at the present time, or else we wouldn't see the major producers of Non-Cubans pushing out the next great full-bodied cigar, meant to blow your head off when you smoke it. I would much rather have a delicate, floral noted blend that never pushes the edge to over-powering itself, over a monster of spice and pepper that leaves you tongue looking for a knife to scrape it clean. I like to taste my cigars as I'm smoking them, not two days later.


right on the money.
i handed my boss (who smokes nothing but padron 3000s and LGC Series Rs) an Epi #2... he said it was mild, he couldn't "taste" it. i think he meant to say, "my buds are fried from being overpowered with harshness that they don't _feel_ anything."

example - when coppertop was new to cubans (as i was), i had him try a few drags off my la gloria md'o #4. he said he couldn't "feel it". the taste was awesome, but someone saying they can't "feel" it is another version of what you're saying.


----------



## mcgoospot (Jan 1, 2000)

I really have not noticed this phenomenon, maybe because of the cigars that I smoke. For example, I generally only smoke certain cigars with certain taste charecteristics. In the robusto line, I smokke RASS, PSD#4s and CoRos (Although I do have a cab of '98 Ex#4s that I smoke). The flavors of these are very distinctive and they don't taste alike at all. Same thing with Corona Gordos. Smokke Sig IVs, SS#2s, Super Coronas and mag46s. Occasionally I'll throw in something like a RG Corona Extra but I generally stay with cigars that I know I'll like and which are generally different from each other.

I do know, however, that on occasion I've found that a Hoyo Epi #2 tasted similar to a PSD#4 (a recent batch [email protected] were much spicier than I remembered, but I only had two of these obtained in a trade so I really didn't have a whole box to compare them with.) I had noticed back in the late '90s and early '00s that alot of my cigars tasted alike. BCGs, RyJ Churchills, SLR Churchills, etc... all had that distinctive Cuban flavor but nothing to distinguish it from another Cuban. Have not noticed thever, since '02.


----------



## LasciviousXXX (Oct 12, 2004)

As I stated earlier in this thread I was going to do a little comparing of my own inspired by all the great posts from the FOG's in the thread. I really wanted to experience for myself if this is true. Or even if I could discern one cigars characteristics from another. So I decided to compare an '02 Upmann Sir Winston to an '02 SLR Churchill.

Keep in mind that I'm a relative Newb to Habanos so in NO way are my thoughts or opinions anywhere close to a FOG's. 

So here we go:
Earlier in the week I smoked an '02 Upmann Sir Winnie. Beautiful cigar that is really just gorgeous to look at. Very Nice flavors, initial floral taste that developed into a woody flavor. Smoke was medium bodied but very rich and tasty. It was just starting to come into its own IMO, complex floral flavors lasted throughout the entire smoke although they were very subtle towards the end. Elegant smoke with much to offer in the flavor department.

Then last nite I smoked an SLR Churchill from '02. This was the cigar that Poker referred to in the initial thread as possibly tasting like the Sir Winnie. Initial flavors were cedary and a little spice flavor. Definitely more full bodied than the Sir Winston. IMO, flavors were nowhere near each other. No floral notes in the Churchill, during the 1st half the cedary flavor took on some honey notes mixed in with the spice. Last half of the cigar started tasting more like a spicy cinnamon flavor. The smoke then took on a "doughy" consistency for lack of a better term.

So in summation, to me, the flavors were not that similar. This could have something to do with the crops being '02 instead of the initial 97's and 98 that Poker referred to. Or it might have something to do with me being not as experienced as some of the FOG's when it comes to Habanos.

I don't think I could pick out what brand the cigar was in a blind taste test but I could definitely tell that they were two different cigars. So there's my little input into this great discussion.

Discuss!


----------



## Fredster (Jan 26, 2004)

Matt R said:


> Habanos did it on each and every cigar, pre-96. The powerhouse cigar that is so popular today, really is somewhat new. Sure, there were powerful Habanos in the past, most Bolivars for example, but in general the blends were a lot milder than todays blends. For some people this is obvious what they like to smoke and they find the right time for it. That's why they make so many different types of cigars. But, for someone who relishes the past blends, these newer blends really make me shy away from purchases. I haven't had but less than a dozen cigars from '03-'05 (aside from two and a half boxes of the LCDH Cologne Gold Medals) and they have all been way too much for me to enjoy. Will they mellow and mature into a great cigar, yeah, I think quite a few of them will. The Montecristo D seems to fit that bill, though it was just too harsh for me at present smoking condition.


I'm no expert on 94 and earlier Cubans for sure, but the few boxes or so I've had were not milder. I would say more robust and more complex. The old Part. C-Hills, Lusi's, and D4's all seem richer and fuller compared to todays blends. Some 94's and earlier seem to really mellow though, like the Monte #2. Smoothe as velvet. I like different cigars on different occasions but smoke more full flavored ones than not. Had a 01 Punch SS #2 last night. Fantastic. Most people say they aren't ready to smoke yet, but I loved it. I stay away from 03-05 also. Not because they are too strong, they just have some rough notes and a lot of flavors are not there yet that are generated with age.


----------



## opus (Jun 21, 2005)

What would be the advantage in ruining the quality of cigars produced? Short term cash influx at best. I gotta believe that the experienced smokers (probably the ones with deep pockets buying cigars) would soon discover this. It could ruin the entire industry. It would be like cutting their own throats. Surely they want to improve quality. Maybe just some off years of production, at least I hope so.:2


----------



## plexiprs (Nov 18, 2005)

My experience has been that over the years the flavors have been blended closer together and attempting to minimize or eliminate the youthfullness of most lines or reduce the sick period. In general it seems that the wallop has decreased in all lines over say 7-10 years. I appreciated the older blends that some took as too overpowering when not matured, and have deepened in flavor and smoothed their roughness off.

It seems that the target is a cigar more smokeable right after delivery, or soon there after. A consequence of the NOW mentality? I don't know, but I miss the older flavor and power and the variety. Homogenous blending to appeal to today's buyer is a possibility.


----------



## opus (Jun 21, 2005)

plexiprs said:


> My experience has been that over the years the flavors have been blended closer together and attempting to minimize or eliminate the youthfullness of most lines or reduce the sick period. In general it seems that the wallop has decreased in all lines over say 7-10 years. I appreciated the older blends that some took as too overpowering when not matured, and have deepened in flavor and smoothed their roughness off.
> 
> It seems that the target is a cigar more smokeable right after delivery, or soon there after. A consequence of the NOW mentality? I don't know, but I miss the older flavor and power and the variety. * Homogenous blending to appeal to today's buyer is a possibility*.


Today's buyer is yesterday's buyer, only with more experience and money


----------



## ESP (Jan 1, 2000)

opusxox said:


> What would be the advantage in ruining the quality of cigars produced? Short term cash influx at best. I gotta believe that the experienced smokers (probably the ones with deep pockets buying cigars) would soon discover this. It could ruin the entire industry. It would be like cutting their own throats. Surely they want to improve quality. Maybe just some off years of production, at least I hope so.:2


I am afraid the real problem started after "Death of El Corojo". Habanos started experimenting with habanos 2000 in '98 but they went full production by 2000 (give and take a year or so - I am just writing from memory!),, you probably have already seen the following article, but I paste it for those who haven't:

quoted from CA

Published August/September 2000

CIGAR DIARY

*The Death of El Corojo *
*Cuba's premier wrapper tobacco has been sent to its grave* 
By James Suckling

No tears were shed in Cuba when the last seeds of El Corojo were planted in the rich red soils of the Vuelta Abajo, Cuba's premier tobacco-growing region. Cuban tobacco experts don't seem 100 percent sure when it happened, probably about 1997 or so, but what can be safely said today is that El Corojo is dead. That is something to lament.

I can't help thinking about the now extinct wrapper tobacco every time I smoke one of my beautiful well-aged Cuban cigars. I often feel nostalgic and sad when I gaze upon the dark brown wrapper. It satisfies my eyes and titillates my palate. Many cigarmakers say that a wrapper contributes very little to the overall quality of a cigar since it only accounts for 5 to 8 percent of the bulk of a smoke. But I disagree. It's like saying a gorgeous designer dress doesn't add to the attraction of a beautifully figured woman. Just take the wrapper off a cigar and smoke it and you know immediately that it does have an effect: the wrapperless cigar just doesn't taste as good.

First developed in the 1930s at the El Corojo plantation outside San Juan y Martinez, Cuba, El Corojo had served as the wrapper for some of the greatest cigars ever made on the island: from the aristocratic Por Larrañaga Magnum to the ritzy Cohiba Esplendido. It was the first thing to catch the eye of keen cigar smokers, from Fidel Castro and John F. Kennedy to you and me. Its oily, silky grain look was irresistible. El Corojo makes a cigar look so rich and beautiful that it makes you want to smoke it.

But that's over now. At least that's what José Redonet of the Tobacco Research Center says. This past February, during the final week of the tobacco harvest, I visited Redonet and a few of his colleagues in San Juan y Martinez, the Cuban town in which the largest percentage of premium wrapper tobacco is grown. Redonet coldly explained that El Corojo was too susceptible to diseases such as black shank, a root fungus that causes the tobacco stalk to wither and the leaves to droop, and blue mold, so growers could no longer risk using the tobacco. "If a grower planted El Corojo today, there's a very good chance that he would end up with little or no tobacco at the end of the harvest," Redonet said, as he walked through hundreds of rows of Habanos 2000 wrapper tobacco growing under cheesecloth netting.

Redonet said that most tobacco growers now opt for such alternatives as Habanos 2000, Criollo 98 and 99, and Corojo 99. These are all hybrids of El Corojo, meaning they have been crossbred with the original and then other tobacco types to make them more resistant to diseases. Apparently, the leaves from the hybrids are also larger, with a better, longer shape for making cigars. In addition, Redonet suggested that the new tobacco could be processed more quickly than El Corojo, making the wrapper available for cigar rolling a few months earlier than in the past. This is important, since the Cubans have been in a bit of a bind recently due to a shortage of large wrapper leaves. They even have had to close some of their more prestigious cigar factories or reduce their output.

However, I still had some concerns: How are these new tobacco types going to influence the way Cuban cigars taste? Is that rich, spicy, cedar aroma from a great Habano going to be a thing of the past? The officials at the research center certainly didn't think so. I posed the question to a group of them as we lunched on black beans and rice and some hunks of greasy roasted pork. They all agreed with Redonet. "I am sure that there is no difference organoleptically with these tobacco types and El Corojo," Redonet said reassuringly. "The experts have smoked the new tobacco types and they say there is no difference."

Strangely, after lunch I noticed that no one was smoking. So I offered them each a robusto-sized Partagas Serie D No. 4. There were no takers. I was shocked when I found out that none of them smoked. "You guys are like a great chef who doesn't eat his own food or a winemaker who only drinks water. How can you say that Habana 2000 or Corojo 99 is no different than El Corojo?" I asked. They thought this was very funny. But I wasn't joking.

Maybe it's my imagination, but I think that today's Cuban cigars taste different from my older cigars, although the quality of today's Cuban cigars appears to be better. A few years ago, you could find one box of super quality smokes but five or six that were complete crap. After visiting reputable tobacco dealers in London, Geneva, Milan, Bordeaux, Havana, Munich, Cancun and Paris, I can safely say that I haven't seen the smokes look this good in years. However, when I smoke these new cigars, they don't seem to have the intense spicy, earthy tobacco character that I have come to love and expect from a Cuban smoke. They are damned good smokes, but they seem more mild with a little less character. When I compare my current Habanos to those with four or five years of age in my humidor, I find the older ones much more powerful and exciting. Maybe it's a question of age, but I have my doubts.

The prehybrid smokes could one day be likened to the pre-phylloxera wines of Europe that have a legendary reputation among great wine collectors. These are wines that were made primarily before 1880 from old, gnarly vines whose roots were anchored deep in the soil to extract an amazing amount of nutrients. They produced concentrated wine grapes with character. Unfortunately, they had not been grafted or spliced to American rootstock to protect them from the ravenous root louse that destroyed most of Europe's vineyards during the latter part of the nineteenth century. On a number of occasions I have tasted such pre-phylloxera wines as 1865 Lafite, 1870 Latour and recently 1863 Latour and 1870 Climens, and the character and concentration they still deliver are out of this world.

I now find myself buying more and more cigars with three or four years of box age, thinking that these may be the last Cuban smokes of an era. Maybe the new cigars with their hybrid wrappers are better. Only time will tell. But they don't have the style of El Corojo wrappers--those irresistible, velvety textured, opened-grain oily ones grown in the heart of the Vuelta Abajo. "

Amen,,


----------



## jgros001 (Jun 14, 2005)

So, if the blending is becoming less discernable from brand to brand, would you say that MRN's tasting notes are not applicable for today's habanos? From my reading his tasting notes are based on aged smokes which should fall under the older blends. If the blends have changed, the tasting notes, it would follow, may not be accurate for today's ('02 to present) blends. Any comments?


----------



## poker (Dec 11, 1997)

Damn I forgot all about this thread LOL!!!!


----------



## opus (Jun 21, 2005)

jgros001 said:


> So, if the blending is becoming less discernable from brand to brand, would you say that MRN's tasting notes are not applicable for today's habanos? From my reading his tasting notes are based on aged smokes which should fall under the older blends. If the blends have changed, the tasting notes, it would follow, may not be accurate for today's ('02 to present) blends. Any comments?


Stands to reason, doesn't it. Makes MRN a strictly historical account of what used to be. Not to be used as a purchasing guide book.


----------



## ESP (Jan 1, 2000)

poker said:


> Damn I forgot all about this thread LOL!!!!


welcome to the Habanos Lounge! :r


----------



## Fredster (Jan 26, 2004)

jgros001 said:


> So, if the blending is becoming less discernable from brand to brand, would you say that MRN's tasting notes are not applicable for today's habanos? From my reading his tasting notes are based on aged smokes which should fall under the older blends. If the blends have changed, the tasting notes, it would follow, may not be accurate for today's ('02 to present) blends. Any comments?


I've brought this up before that a lot of his recommendations for age may not be correct (when talking about 1994 or earlier Cubatobacco cigars). However a lot of blends did not change. He points out quite a few that have not. I've found that I agree with most of his aging recommendations. The Esplendidos and Lanceros both need about 5 years he says. Both of these cigars are totally different blends now, but the 5 years still seems to hold true IMO. It's still a great book with lots of great info. The aging stuff is not going to the same for everyones tastes anyways even if the blends did not change. Good place to start for aging info, but not etched in stone for sure.


----------



## Fredster (Jan 26, 2004)

opusxox said:


> What would be the advantage in ruining the quality of cigars produced? Short term cash influx at best. I gotta believe that the experienced smokers (probably the ones with deep pockets buying cigars) would soon discover this. It could ruin the entire industry. It would be like cutting their own throats. Surely they want to improve quality. Maybe just some off years of production, at least I hope so.:2


I always thought it had to do more with trying to water down the blends to appeal to more smokers (newbies), so they could sell more cigars. Lack of certain raw materials may have influenced certain cigars tasting bland and similar also.


----------



## plexiprs (Nov 18, 2005)

opusxox said:


> Today's buyer is yesterday's buyer, only with more experience and money


I'd agree that a lot of buyers from 10-15 years ago are still buying today and have grown in experience and available resorces, but the cigar boom and proliferation across the internet of suppliers has attracted new buyers, who it seems to me, are less finicky in their tastes or less experienced. The new buyer is the young affluent country club set who uses these purchases like they use a Rolex or Brietling watch - status and visible demonstration of their wealth.


----------



## mosesbotbol (Sep 21, 2005)

plexiprs said:


> I'd agree that a lot of buyers from 10-15 years ago are still buying today and have grown in experience and available resorces, but the cigar boom and proliferation across the internet of suppliers has attracted new buyers, who it seems to me, are less finicky in their tastes or less experienced. The new buyer is the young affluent country club set who uses these purchases like they use a Rolex or Brietling watch - status and visible demonstration of their wealth.


I'll take the change in blends vs. 10+ years ago, as long as they can put a box together with 25 good cigars. There use to be 2-3 stinkers per box and that was such a let down.

I agree that many just see cigars, especially Cohibas as status symbols and couldn't tell the difference or could care less. How many wine collectors could really tell a Lafite from a $20.00 Bordeaux?


----------



## opus (Jun 21, 2005)

plexiprs said:


> I'd agree that a lot of buyers from 10-15 years ago are still buying today and have grown in experience and available resorces, but the cigar boom and proliferation across the internet of suppliers has attracted new buyers, who it seems to me, are less finicky in their tastes or less experienced. The new buyer is the young affluent country club set who uses these purchases like they use a Rolex or Brietling watch - status and visible demonstration of their wealth.


Very good point. This is where fakes come into play. They really don't care as long as it says Cohiba on the band.


----------



## Roger Miller" (Apr 15, 2004)

opusxox said:


> Very good point. This is where fakes come into play. They really don't care as long as it says Cohiba on the band.


Know any of these folks? I got a couple of boxes i's like to sell to them. 

_____
rm


----------



## plexiprs (Nov 18, 2005)

opusxox said:


> Very good point. This is where fakes come into play. They really don't care as long as it says Cohiba on the band.


And it is now a problem since so many folks develop a taste for the "fakes" they think are real. I've had folks argue and deny and even disclaim the authentic items, and finally when overwhelmed with proof they state that they prefer "their" versions anyway!

In this town, fakes are rife, and they demand a price that makes me cringe. $25-$40 is usual price for fake BBF on or around the Strip, others are much much higher.


----------



## ATLHARP (May 3, 2005)

poker said:


> I was reading ASC (alt.smokers.cigars newsgroup) and saw an interesting thread that got me thinking.
> 
> Here is what it said (cut & paste)
> 
> ...


yes,

The HU Connoisseuers are definitely in the same flavor profile as an SLR Regios. I like the HU a little better because it has a little bit better flavor and tends to come on around bit faster with aging. I have tried the R&J Exhibition No.4's and I did not like them and they taste nothing like the HU Conny's! Now the cabinet selection I can't say, but the boxed one tasted like arse!u

ATL


----------



## One Lonely Smoker (Jan 21, 2005)

jgros001 said:


> So, if the blending is becoming less discernable from brand to brand, would you say that MRN's tasting notes are not applicable for today's habanos? From my reading his tasting notes are based on aged smokes which should fall under the older blends. If the blends have changed, the tasting notes, it would follow, may not be accurate for today's ('02 to present) blends. Any comments?


Outstanding observation and I would say without question yes. But then again, some complain that his tasting notes are all the same. I disagree, but on this, I would say that's for his next book to cover. Truth is no one knows how this is evolving right now. I have been semi-lambasted here when I brought up the newer curing techniques, and came out on the far losing end of the thread I once posted on cigars all tasting about the same. I think they often do. What I see from my current position in the market is that the GREAT volume of havanas are actually more accurately populated with with alot of special cigars all in different boxes. I was talking the other night about how a box population might contain 25% awseome cigars 25 to 50 percent pretty good cigars and 25% or so run of the mill cuban tobacco cigars. Mind you, not talking construction here, but blend specifically. As often as not, the awesome cigars will have a flavor that people describe as too complex to describe, or a swirl of delicious but confused and un-balanced flavor. The tastes are so awesome that we remember it long, but that flavor might not actually be a part of the normal expectation of a particular brand/vitola. That's my observation and two cents. Every dog has it's day in Havana. Cigars you hate today could be unbelievable tomorrow. But yeah, I think that at times these cigars are just really good. Truly Great is not so common nowadays. At least they smoke better.


----------



## LasciviousXXX (Oct 12, 2004)

Earlier in this thread I compared an '02 SLR Churchill to an '02 Upmann Sir Winston to test this theory brought up in the original thread.

Now I've just got done comparing 2 cigars from '98. You can see the results here:
http://www.clubstogie.com/vb/showthread.php?t=20049

Enjoy! And please let me know what you think.

Dustin
XXX


----------



## poker (Dec 11, 1997)

...and to think I was losing my mind :r


----------



## LasciviousXXX (Oct 12, 2004)

poker said:


> ...and to think I was losing my mind :r


No no, you're still going crazy Poker.... you've just got company on the trip LOL


----------



## NCRadioMan (Feb 28, 2005)

Bump. This thread rocks with mucho info! A sticky perhaps?


:ms NCRM


----------



## Fredster (Jan 26, 2004)

LasciviousXXX said:


> Earlier in this thread I compared an '02 SLR Churchill to an '02 Upmann Sir Winston to test this theory brought up in the original thread.
> 
> Now I've just got done comparing 2 cigars from '98. You can see the results here:
> http://www.clubstogie.com/vb/showthread.php?t=20049
> ...


I know this is an old thread, but I just smoked a 98 Sir Winnie recently. No comparison to an SLR at all. The Sir Winnie is such a full flavor complex cigar with age it's amazing. SLR can be good in cabs with age, but they have nowhere near the depth of the Sir W IMO.


----------



## drill (Jan 1, 2000)

jgros001 said:


> So, if the blending is becoming less discernable from brand to brand, would you say that MRN's tasting notes are not applicable for today's habanos? From my reading his tasting notes are based on aged smokes which should fall under the older blends. If the blends have changed, the tasting notes, it would follow, may not be accurate for today's ('02 to present) blends. Any comments?


---------------------
bwaaaahahaaahaaaaaaaaaa!
very funny indeed.
why would 1 persons tasting notes apply to anyone else ?
unless of coarse you have the exact same tastebud facilities as another.

k


----------



## drevim (Dec 21, 2005)

drill said:


> ---------------------
> bwaaaahahaaahaaaaaaaaaa!
> very funny indeed.
> why would 1 persons tasting notes apply to anyone else ?
> ...


First off, this thread rocks, glad it was dug up out of the past.

Secondly, I couldn't agree more, Kerry. Mr. MRN and I don't seem to sinc up on some of the more common sticks I've tried. Although I do like the fact he thinks the Party Short is one of the best short sticks, which I do tend to agree with. Fortuantely, based on several comparison reviews, I have found a couple of BOTLs from here, that do seem to be sharing my taste buds. The only bad thing is, based on recent photos of a certain WI herf, I'm scared what may be tainting one of these individuals taste buds :r


----------



## Ivory Tower (Nov 18, 2005)

Isn't part of the difference in the observations here that some of the citations here are discussing cigars not only from a different era but also with some age, i.e., an article written in '00 about cigars from '90, and wouldn't that weaken the analogy of our observations in '06 about '03s for instance? Could it be that MRNs observations could apply to current production, in several years?

It seems like the consenus is that the homogenizing of blends has taken place, but that quality might be better. Is that right?

I'm certainly in no position to know, because everything I have and am likely to get is mainly from '05 and newer. I am happy with the habanos I have had, so I guess that's a good thing.

Personally, I don't know anyone who use habanos as a status symbol. Some of them like the taste, but also like the 'cool factor' or think it's impressive - is that the same as showing your wealth - I'm not sure. I know some people that may not really know, or care apparently, about the authenticity of their 'Cuban' cigars as long as they are decent smokes. And I hope those folks aren't influencing Cuba's production. 

Enough rambling from me.... Interesting thread.


----------



## ky toker (Jun 2, 2005)

*Whoa! Great thread.*

I'm not going to bother spilling my inexperienced drivel into this; I'll just read.


----------



## Baric (Jun 14, 2006)

Ive never found this when smoking-there have always been lots of different flavours and aromas in all my havanas (both lit and unlit). Maybe some of it is psychosomatic-did you tell any ofyour friends about the report before you smoked them so they were expecting them to taste the same? i knwo it sounds a bit weird but imo it could be possible...


----------



## Navydoc (Jan 26, 2005)

Between Cuban and Non-cuban...yes! Between Vintage and Fresh Cubans...yes! Between different Cuban brands...yes! Within the same brand and age...Grey...more so now:2


----------



## icehog3 (Feb 20, 2005)

drevim said:


> based on recent photos of a certain WI herf, I'm scared what may be tainting one of these individuals taste buds :r


Why I oughta....... :r


----------



## Bigwaved (May 20, 2006)

Thanks, FOGs, for letting us newbs be a fly on the wall. This thread is both interesting and informative.


----------



## LasciviousXXX (Oct 12, 2004)

I love old threads.

Specially ones that are so informative like this one. Every time I read through this thread I learn a little bit more. Note to newbs like me.... pay attention when these FOG's start talking.


XXX


----------



## dyj48 (May 1, 2006)

Wow, very impressive thread with lots of great insights and experiences. It makes me think about how many significant factors operate in when we taste a habanos cigar. 

First factor is the year in which the cigar was made which may be dependent on the crop much like wine is dependent on the grapes that year. A second factor might be the age of the cigar and how it was kept (in a good and consistent humidor). 

An important third factor might be that different people may have different experiences with the same cigar depending on their experiences and ability to discern the distinctions among these cigars. A noob or even someone with a few years experience may detect only a few of the nuances that someone smoking 10 or more years may detect as drill states. It could also be dependent on what you smoked as indicated by flipflop or even ate or drank during that day.

I like Pokers idea of conducting a blindsmoke of similar cigars side by side in herfs by different people may help clarify how these distinctions operate. Might be fun to try it again..just some random thoughts......


----------



## Bigwaved (May 20, 2006)

This one is fun and informative. I read it a while back and learned some. I reread it just now and learned some more. With more exposure to different cigars discussed, I am starting to scratch the surface.


----------



## RPB67 (Mar 26, 2005)

Bigwaved said:


> This one is fun and informative. I read it a while back and learned some. I reread it just now and learned some more. With more exposure to different cigars discussed, I am starting to scratch the surface.


Keep Scratching. Scratching is good.


----------



## filly (Dec 12, 1997)

Wow, I remember this thread too! What is really neat though is one of the members is no longer with us (Edisonbird) and I enjoyed that stroll down memory lane along with reading from some of the guys I haven't seen from in awhile.:ss


----------



## habanaman (Feb 11, 2006)

poker said:


> I was reading ASC (alt.smokers.cigars newsgroup) and saw an interesting thread that got me thinking.
> 
> Here is what it said (cut & paste)
> 
> ...


Dear friends many robusto produced in Briones montoto called Romeo y julieta has the same identic blend of hermosos.!!

This is the true !!!! I am sorry for who thinking again that each size has different blend ..Not always is so!

Angelo


----------



## omowasu (Aug 9, 2006)

I dont know... I recently had a RASS, MC4, PLPC, and RYJ2 (en cedro). They all had similar base flavors, but I could tell subtle differences in flavor overtones. All were from the same year and close dates. The RASS was a standout in nub-ability. 

I think I will need to try this again! There is always an excuse if you look hard enough!


----------



## habanaman (Feb 11, 2006)

omowasu said:


> I dont know... I recently had a RASS, MC4, PLPC, and RYJ2 (en cedro). They all had similar base flavors, but I could tell subtle differences in flavor overtones. All were from the same year and close dates. The RASS was a standout in nub-ability.
> 
> I think I will need to try this again! There is always an excuse if you look
> 
> hard enough!


I say this "about same blend" because i have all blend used in Romeo y julieta factory....and many size has the same blend!!

angelo


----------



## Lumpold (Apr 28, 2005)

omowasu said:


> I dont know... I recently had a RASS, MC4, PLPC, and RYJ2 (en cedro). They all had similar base flavors, but I could tell subtle differences in flavor overtones. All were from the same year and close dates. The RASS was a standout in nub-ability.
> 
> I think I will need to try this again! There is always an excuse if you look hard enough!


I believe that it is how the blend is used that determines the flavour profiles of the cigars, rollers often use differing blends to create a similar flavour throughout a line of cigars... It might well be possible to make two cigars from the same blend with different tastes... who knows. Somebody get Fidel on the phone and demand an answer.


----------



## MoTheMan (May 24, 2003)

habanaman said:


> Dear friends many robusto produced in Briones montoto called Romeo y julieta has the same identic blend of hermosos.!!
> 
> This is the true !!!! I am sorry for who thinking again that each size has different blend ..Not always is so!
> 
> Angelo


You know, I've heard you say this before Angelo, and I believe that you said you witnessed this yourself while visiting the factories in Cuba.

It certainly makes sense based on what my tastebuds are telling me.

I personally think that Habanos has been tweaking blends recently, mostly to streamline production and simplify the bunching, while still trying to maintain the general nuance of a particular marca & vitola.

I've no doubt if you go to a factory you'll find them using the same set of leaves to make two or three different brands of the same vitola.
NOW, they may change the leaf sequence in the blend in order to change the cigar entirely, or they may even change the ratios of the different leaves by only a small amount and still achieve a similar change.

Just my :2 .


----------

